“New Study gives high marks to Jersey Community Colleges” was the heading for a Star Ledger” article of 1-20-16. Its supporting information was that “17% of community college students earned a Bachelor’s degree within six years of starting college, versus 14% nationally.”
Yipes, with success like that, there would be no such thing as misleading advertising. In fact it seems there is justification for applying the term “misleading” to the entire educational system:
*The free high school diploma does not remotely mean the student is ready for the paid experience of college. And a student’s change during his K-12 years from ESL to regular classes does not necessarily mean no ESL will be needed at college.
*Receipt of a two-year diploma does not automatically equate with being ready either for a four-year college or for the job market.
*Earning a four-year degree is a ticket to possible conversations about employment; however, with a majority of professions and employers requiring higher credentials than ever (a nice economic benefit to vendors of higher education), there can still be a rude awakening at that first job interview. (Positive note: even during the Great Recession, Bachelor-degree holders at least were able to get jobs; unemployment was about one-third of that of high school graduates.)
More philosophically, there is a growing debate about the purpose of college – is it educating a young person to be a well-rounded citizen — or is it getting a student ready for the world of full-time employment. Some colleges and companies are collaborating more on the design of curricula; that partnership tells you directly the purpose of that school.
*No, those three-hour classes are not really three hours, more like 2.5 hours.
*Students are fourth on the list of priorities for many professors, who can be more concerned with getting published or receiving citations in professional journals or winning grants for their pet projects.
*Regardless of what college A says, or how the law reads, college B will in all probability not accept 100% of those credits from college A.
*All that hoopla about the college’s Career Center? About 2% of graduates find their jobs as a result of using said resource.
*College financial statements are insulting. Example A: the school lists 13 thirteen types of fees, ranging from $359 down to $5.00; included is a $150 fee for Academic Excellence and Success. These fee designations are simply a way that the college can say with a straight face that its tuition only went up x%, when the total cost is going up more rapidly because of the proliferation of fees. Besides, isn’t academic success supposed to be the central idea of the higher education program being sold to the customer students.
*The college financial award letter covering Pell grants and Federal loans is often misunderstood by college newcomers. Grants are not repaid, while loans must be repaid – they should be identified separately. And in neither case is the money coming from the college that is patting itself on the back for giving the award to the student. The college is fully aware that financially challenged students not familiar with the world of higher education frequently make no distinction between the two categories of financial aid. The reason is that they are simply happy to be accepted by the school, and the latter knows that if the debt portion were separately discussed, some students might have second thoughts about their selection of that college.
*College itself has been oversold, as if it were the one and only path to a happy life. It is no coincidence that many high schoolers are indifferent to the task of figuring out a life path. Simply put, they do not like school and cannot think warmly about the idea of spending another several years in a classroom, in part learning more stuff they have no current interest in and cannot see being useful in their lives.
So where is the message about the merits of becoming a policeperson, an electrician, a plumber, a beautician, a specialist in the repair of computers, an auto mechanic? Where is the analysis of what is required to earn the credentials associated with these marketable skills, which can generate income of $25-30 an hour without the time and money required for a Bachelor’s degree?
A Pew Research report of 2-5-2016 used the label of NEET to categorize the 17% of Americans ages 16-29 who are Neither Employed nor in Education or Training. The ratio for blacks was 22%; for Hispanics, 20%; for whites, 13%. Two-thirds had a high school education or less. Does not this data call for a different approach to communicating the longer list of options which are available to high schoolers not fixated on the college route to a career?
The message about different choices should be delivered at schools covering every level of the socioeconomic ladder. The profile of the messenger should vary to accommodate the logical point of view by a student that says, “I cannot be what I cannot see.”
http://bobhowittbooks.com/?page_id=22